Significant incident Plymouth

Id love to see you hit a clay pigeon with an air rifle, that would be pretty amazing.

Unfortunately we're debating against people with no first hand experience of firearms and the culture around them in the UK. You're ******* in the wind because you'll never sway their opinion.
 
Well the tiny minority of the population that is gun owners.


People have tried suggesting reasonable adjustments and sport gun owners are stomping their feet saying its inconvenient.


Sport/fun gun ownership just cost lives.


It's no skin of 99% of the populations nose to demand all guns be banned.

An industry can be set up where incredibly well vetted people store guns in a police station and provide services to farmers

Outside of that nothing at all. No FARC no shotguns.
Nothing.

It wouldn't affect practically any voter.

Lobby groups may say please save our industry with gun clubs alowed to hold a stock people can rent for use.

Maybe even their own if we store it.

But the position of the electorate may well be "we don't want our children dying for your Sport, or your convenience".


If there was a referendum do you honestly think the 1%(?) Of the population that owns guns for fun would win?

I don't know what sports or hobbies you enjoy but scale the numbers up enough and someone has probably died from it (no matter how stupid).

I mean, do you like alcohol at all for example? Say we could save one child's life from a drunk driver by completely banning alcohol - your argument is that that is a no brainer? Surely you can see the foolishness of it? Everything is a balance of risk versus freedom.
 
Unfortunately we're debating against people with no first hand experience of firearms and the culture around them in the UK. You're ******* in the wind because you'll never sway their opinion.

Yes, this is my fear. They would soon change their tune if it was something they liked or enjoyed.

Id like to think a few logical examples and well rounded arguments might win over a few on the margin though!
 
Matt Easton did a good video on it a little while ago, regarding weapons bans in general. He's mainly interested in swords, but the same principle applies to all weapons. The example he used was pets. Nobody needs a pet and pets cause a lot of harm. Quite a few people are killed by pets. A lot of environmental harm is caused by pets. But that was just the example he uses for a wider argument. I think he does a good job of a summary. The video is only 9 minutes long.


Pets are shown to be very beneficial for mental health.

I don't think swords and guns are...
 
I don't think swords and guns are...

Hobbies and interests generally are good for people's mental health whatever they are.

Yes, this is my fear. They would soon change their tune if it was something they liked or enjoyed.

Id like to think a few logical examples and well rounded arguments might win over a few on the margin though!

It is like banning all cars faster than say 40MPH in case someone gets hurt... bare with me... especially racing cars, screw licensing anything faster so people can enjoy racing them on the track because there is a tiny chance someone might use one to hurt people - they can find another hobby...

It is a cheap and easy fix when you aren't affected by it except when it goes wrong - screw anyone who finds enjoyment from it they can do something else instead.
 
They would soon change their tune if it was something they liked or enjoyed.
some would, i wouldn't. i've been clay pigeon shooting a few times and hugely enjoyed it. i would love to own a gun but i will never keep one in the house. guns for leisure use have no place in a domestic setting, in my opinion.
 
Do people have no restraint? Whinging that guns shouldn't be banned in a thread about a mass murdering gun man? Show a bit of decorum.
 
Ah yes, we should do more to support and cuddle racists and misogynists. That’ll work. Those proud boys and Nazis are the way they are not because they are bad people, but because they simply don’t get enough love and affection.

Education and support for men is important, but so is stamping out and not accepting racism. WW2 wasn’t won in the debate school or via the theory of ideas.

Not sure how you turned the race card in on this as women can be just as racist as men - it's not dictated by gender (male/female)

Education and support is definitely important and I wonder if the lack of support for men in things like mental health, being victims in abusive relationships, suicide prevention etc are drivers in a lot of bad outcomes.

There are huge support networks in place for women in these areas compared to men who are still more likely to either be ridiculed/dismissed than supported or fear the ridicule/dismissal so don't come forward.
 
some would, i wouldn't. i've been clay pigeon shooting a few times and hugely enjoyed it. i would love to own a gun but i will never keep one in the house. guns for leisure use have no place in a domestic setting, in my opinion.

A fair opinion, you sound like someone who could take it or leave it.

Those that are really into it like to have their own personal gun, which they clean and mod and tinker with a bit like someone who is into cars might - remember a shotgun should be 'fitted' its quite a personal thing. Some people will get a kick out of collecting and others actually buy fancy shotguns as an investment, none of these guys would go for having a bog standard gun stored at the range.

Personally, 50% of the hobby is the shooting, the other 50% is research, learning and tinkering (rifles mainly).

I don't reload my own ammunition but lots of guys do - they are literally spending years perfecting the perfect bullet to match their gun for shooting a particular distance - its equally impressive and anal at the same time :)
 
WW2 wasn’t won in the debate school or via the theory of ideas.

No, but the reunification of Europe after WW2 was. The Soviet Bloc crumbled in part because the people of the various satellite states, including East Germany in particular, embraced a more liberal politic.
 
I don't know what sports or hobbies you enjoy but scale the numbers up enough and someone has probably died from it (no matter how stupid).

I mean, do you like alcohol at all for example? Say we could save one child's life from a drunk driver by completely banning alcohol - your argument is that that is a no brainer? Surely you can see the foolishness of it? Everything is a balance of risk versus freedom.


Tyranny of the majority I suppose is the logical argument here.


What percentage of the population has to engage with something for the risk to those not involved to be worth it?

I can't think of a single example as one-sided as gun ownership can you?


Prohibition showed that banning alchoholcauses more problems than alcohol
 
Some people are frothing for a knee jerk reaction.

We accept the reality of deaths happening through malice and accident as part of the widespread use of motor vehicles as an example against the mindless line of any deaths being too many.

An extremely rare shooting occurs and there's flurry to penalise the small population of legal gun owners because ???

Because road transport is esential for modern life

Legal gun ownership for sport is utterly pointless?
 
Your calculations are a bit off.

732,233 firearm and shotgun certificates in England and Wales (2019) with 591,302 certificate holders.

Based on the number of certificate holders:

~36m people of working age (say 18-65) - 1.64%

~47m people of voting age - 1.26%
I went off his500k forgot to x100

But I this case your numbers 1.26% of the population own guns and just one of them account for 1% of the murder rate.

That's a worrying statistic isn't it
 
500k out of 30 million is 1.66%, not 0.16%.

Yes dear I quickly did it and forgot to x by 100.

Kind of obvious but it's a pointless argument on the Internet so not world ending.
And the numbers are all still a little meaningless in the context aren't they given the magnitute
 
Back
Top Bottom